Elephants: A missed oppertunity?

[FightingPoultry]

As the title suggests, I have played with and against elephants quite a few times now and on the whole i like the way they have been modeled. Elephant units display a good balance between crushing uberpower and brittleness that makes them such a gamble and fun play.
My only disappointment is that when they rout, they just run away like any other unit, whereas historically they were just as likely to go on an uncontrolled rampage that could inflict as much damage to their own side as to the enemy- (at least that is until their howdahs were able to bang spikes into their brains and kill them.)

I would love to see FOG2 model routing elephants that went some way to representing the chaos caused by their rampaging. Perhaps giving the elephant a random chance of charging an adjacent unit ( regardless of side) or have adjacent units make a disruption check to simulate the confusion they cause would add some extra spice and make them even more fun to play than they are already.

[Ludendorf]

They do kind of set off a morale bomb in your ranks when they rout. But this does sound a lot cooler.

[Barrold713]

In a league game against GrayNemesis, my cataphract unit ended up adjacent to an elephant unit with a general attached. When the general fell, the cataphract unit broke and routed off the field from being disordered when the cohesion check was forced. Morale bomb indeed.

[jomni]

Wouldn't the mahouts stab the elephants in the skull once they get uncontrollable?

[FightingPoultry]

Wouldn't the mahouts stab the elephants in the skull once they get uncontrollable?

That was the general idea - however there are a number of recorded incidences when rampaging elephants caused havoc to their own sides eg at the battle of Thapsus.

[rbodleyscott]

The problem with having elephant units rampaging about the map is that in reality each elephant would rampage in a different direction. Having the whole unit of elephants all rampage in the same (random) direction as if they were rampaging in perfect formation therefore might look cool but isn't very realistic. This is why we represent the rampage by an increase range for proximity cohesion tests when elephants rout.

[Hendricus]

They do kind of set off a morale bomb in your ranks when they rout. But this does sound a lot cooler.

Yep let the opponent test too.

[rbodleyscott]

They do kind of set off a morale bomb in your ranks when they rout. But this does sound a lot cooler.

Yep let the opponent test too.

Let's see some primary sources which mention troops being disrupted/routed by out of control enemy elephants. All of the ones I can think of, it is their own side that is affected. (Presumably because the elephants, not being stupid, are more interested in getting away from their tormentors than in running amok).

I fear expectations are fuelled by elephant representation in other games, which have often overemphasized the rampaging aspect well beyond what is historically justifiable.

[FightingPoultry]

They do kind of set off a morale bomb in your ranks when they rout. But this does sound a lot cooler.

Yep let the opponent test too.

Let's see some primary sources which mention troops being disrupted/routed by out of control enemy elephants. All of the ones I can think of, it is their own side that is affected. (Presumably because the elephants, not being stupid, are more interested in getting away from their tormentors than in running amok).

I fear expectations are fuelled by elephant representation in other games, which have often overemphasized the rampaging aspect well beyond what is historically justifiable.

Perhaps, but maybe as the enemy were already being affected by elephants it wasnt deemed worthy of further discussion , only the fact that elephants were now causing chaos in their own ranks. I do take the point that elephants wouldn't act as a single unit all going in one direction , so perhaps a morale bomb affecting both sides, but maybe having the elephants side taking more of a morale hit more might be a reasonable work around?

[rbodleyscott]

Let's see some primary sources which mention troops being disrupted/routed by out of control enemy elephants. All of the ones I can think of, it is their own side that is affected. (Presumably because the elephants, not being stupid, are more interested in getting away from their tormentors than in running amok).

I fear expectations are fuelled by elephant representation in other games, which have often overemphasized the rampaging aspect well beyond what is historically justifiable.

Perhaps, but maybe as the enemy were already being affected by elephants it wasnt deemed worthy of further discussion , only the fact that elephants were now causing chaos in their own ranks. I do take the point that elephants wouldn't act as a single unit all going in one direction , so perhaps a morale bomb affecting both sides, but maybe having the elephants side taking more of a morale hit more might be a reasonable work around?

Elephants already affect the enemy before they rout. Making them a morale bomb for the enemy when they rout would alter the balance in favour of the elephant user, and we certainly would not want to do it without evidence that it really was a thing. I take your point that it might not be mentioned, but that is just speculation, not evidence.

Taking the example of Zama, the Carthaginian elephants were driven back on their own lines, which they disrupted, they did not run amok in random directions and disrupt the Romans. Likewise the Seleucid elephants at Magnesia - they disrupted the Seleucid phalanx, not the Romans.

As I say, running amok in random directions is a game mechanism from previous games, not a representation of the usual course of historical reality.

[rbodleyscott]

Polybios on Zama:

All arrangements for the battle being complete, and the two opposing forces of Numidian cavalry having been for some time engaged in skirmishing attacks upon each other, Hannibal gave the word to the men on the elephants to charge the enemy. But as they heard the horns and trumpets braying all round them, some of the elephants became unmanageable and rushed back upon the Numidian contingents of the Carthaginian army; and this enabled Massanissa with great speed to deprive the Carthaginian left wing of its cavalry support. The rest of the elephants charged the Roman velites in the spaces between the maniples of the line, and while inflicting much damage on the enemy suffered severely themselves; until, becoming frightened, some of them ran away down the vacant spaces, the Romans letting them pass harmlessly along, according to Scipio's orders, while others ran away to the right under a shower of darts from the cavalry, until they were finally driven clear off the field.

Livy on the same battle:

Just as the general was thus speaking among the Carthaginians, and the national leaders among their countrymen, mainly through interpreters, since foreigners were intermingled, trumpets and horns sounded on the Roman side, and such shouts were raised that the elephants turned against their own men, especially against the left wing, the Mauretanians and Numidians. Masinissa easily increased their panic and stripped that end of the line of its cavalry support. A few of the beasts, however, being fearlessly driven into the enemy, caused great losses among the ranks of the light-armed, though suffering many wounds themselves. For springing back to the maniples the light-armed made way for the elephants, to avoid being trampled down, and then would hurl their javelins from both sides against the beasts doubly exposed to missiles. Nor was there any slackening in the javelins of the men in the front lines until these elephants also, driven out of the Roman line and into their own men by missiles showered upon them from all sides, put the right wing, even the Carthaginian cavalry, to flight.

Appian on Magnesia:

The Macedonian phalanx, which had been stationed between the two bodies of horse in a narrow space in the form of a square, when denuded of cavalry on either side, had opened to receive the light-armed troops, who had been skirmishing in front, and closed again. Thus crowded together, Domitius easily enclosed them with his numerous light cavalry. Having no opportunity to charge or even to deploy their dense mass, they began to suffer severely; and they were indignant that military experience availed them nothing, exposed as they were on all sides to the weapons of the enemy. Nevertheless, they presented their thick-set pikes on all four sides.

They challenged the Romans to close combat and preserved at all times the appearance of being about to charge. Yet they did not advance, because they were foot-soldiers and heavily armed, and saw that the enemy were mounted. Most of all they feared to relax their close formation lest they might not readily bring it together again.

The Romans did not come to close quarters nor approach them because they feared the discipline, the solidity, and the desperation of this veteran corps; but circled around them and assailed them with javelins and arrows, none of which missed their mark in the dense mass, who could neither turn the missiles aside nor dodge them.

After suffering severely in this way they yielded to necessity and fell back step by step, but with a bold front, in perfect order and still formidable to the Romans. The latter kept their distance and continued to circle around and wound them, until the elephants inside the Macedonian phalanx became excited and unmanageable. Then the phalanx broke into disorderly flight.

Polybios on Raphia:

When Ptolemy and his sister after their progress had reached the extremity of his left wing and Antiochus with his horse-guards had reached his extreme right, they gave the signal for battle and brought the elephants first into action. A few only of Ptolemy's elephants ventured to close with those of the enemy, and now the men in the towers on the back of these beasts made a gallant fight of it, striking with their pikes at close quarters and wounding each other, while the elephants themselves fought still better, putting forth their whole strength and meeting forehead to forehead. The way in which these animals fight is as follows. With their tusks firmly interlocked they shove with all their might, each trying to force the other to give ground, until the one who proves strongest pushes aside the other's trunk, and then, when he has once made him turn and has him in the flank, he gores him with his tusks as a bull does with his horns. Most of Ptolemy's elephants, however, declined the combat, as is the habit of African elephants; for unable to stand the smell and the trumpeting of the Indian elephants, and terrified, I suppose, also by their great size and strength, they at once turn tail and take to flight before they get near them. This is what happened on the present occasion; and when Ptolemy's elephants were thus thrown into confusion and driven back on their own lines, Ptolemy's guard gave way under the pressure of the animals.

My point is that while some elephants might possibly run amok into the enemy lines (although it isn't mentioned, and the only damage inflicted on the Romans that is mentioned was at Zama before they routed) the main effect of the elephants routing was on their own side, because routing elephants run away from the enemy, and this is therefore what the game represents.

[FightingPoultry]

well that seems reasonable - thank you for your clarification

[vakarr]

yeah I think elephants are too hard to shoot up (in one game of Skythians vs Bactrian Greeks, I shot at the elephants every turn with horse archers and never caused them to be disrupted and only caused one casualty to the three elephants although one of the elephants did have a general) and they should charge their own side if a friendly unit is in their path after they rout. Also seems strange to me that light javelinmen are easily routed by elephants.

[rbodleyscott]

Also seems strange to me that light javelinmen are easily routed by elephants.

They are supposed to evade them, not stand and fight. See the above quotes.

[vakarr]

If they do that they will probably be caught in the rear

[rbodleyscott]

If they do that they will probably be caught in the rear

Not if they approach the elephants from outside the elephants' charge arc.